Summarise The Most Powerful And Persuasive Argument For Atheism That You Have Read What Is Your Response
Summarise The Most Powerful And Persuasive Argument For Atheism That You Have Read. What Is Your Response?A person who believes in the existence of God, does so not because there is concrete fact to suggest that God does exist, but because they have a feeling, or a need to believe. Their faith can neither be proven correct nor incorrect. It is therefore difficult to persuade a believer not to believe, typically no argument can ever sway the opinion of someone who has unquestionable faith in the existence of God. As an atheist I feel just as strongly about my own beliefs. I cannot believe in something/ someone who to my mind has never physically appeared. It might be argued that Christ was God, but Jesus himself only claimed to be the Son of God. So for me the greatest argument for the non-existence of God is the lack of his physical presence or even any evidence that he exists. I favour this argument not because it is strong, or even particularly well thought out, but because I firmly believe that there is no Deity. I believe this based on the same gut feeling that most religious people would base their faith. People who believe in the existence of God have many proofs, ranging from the proof by design (it is too much o
A good example here is the murder of James Bulger, by John Venables and Robert Thompson. The murderers as children are considered to be innocent, and it shocked people at the time that these two children could be capable of murdering a complete stranger. James Bulger as a three year old child could not be seen to deserve to be murdered and there was seemingly no benefit to be gained from his death. Equally, it is clear that his murderers did not fully understand the implications of their actions. So, what could the motives of a benevolent God possibly be in such a situation. Murder in itself can generally be argued away using the free will argument, because in 75% of cases the victim knows the murderer. However, in the instance of serial murder the victim is not known to the attacker, the crimes are random, an example is Ted Bundy who murdered thirty or more college girls. The victims are not in any way connected with the killer, but are instead the innocent victims of random attack. How is it then possible to defend the existence of a God who allows such events to happen. While Augustine solves the problem of the sovereignty of God and God's goodness, the question of accounting for the presence of evil in the first place remains. Augustine turns to the Bible account of the Fall of humanity given in Genesis as the source of all evil - Genesis 3. Evil enters into the creation because human beings deliberately turn away from the good which is God. All evil - both moral and natural - is thus the result of human sin. There is one further point that I would like to make before discussing the argument in hand. For many years scholars have debated the question of the existence of God, offering proofs for and against his being. However, the whole concept seems floored. For if we are to understand God as being the supreme being then we must surely see him as being above the rationality of mortals, and yet we discuss things that he may or may not have done, and should and shouldn't do, justifying them using our own codes of morality, rationality and ethics. By definition God's actions cannot be rationalised as we rationalise our own. The analogy that immediately springs to mind is that of a court minus the defendant. It would seem foolish to us for a lawyer to defend a man, never having met him, or had a chance to discuss his MO. Applying one's own rational to another is foolish, because typically another person will justify their actions differently, i.e. they will have another motive for doing something due to the fact that people think independently, and not as a group. Our actions and reasons are personal, perhaps influenced, but unique - a benefit of free will. So, it is not only arrogant, but foolish to try and argue for or against the existence of God based on nature, natural events, emotions, states of being, circumstance or situation. Therefore the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproved and the result is that belief comes down to a simple choice, you either do or you don't - and your reason can be no more than a feeling, and cannot be based on physical evidence.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Swinburne Hick, Jesus Equally, Creation Ivan, God God, Natural Evil, Whilst Swinburne's, Ted Bundy, MO Applying, Presence Evil, According Swinburne, existence god, presence evil, human freedom, evil exist, natural evil, god god, free defence, evil world, non-existence god, evil exists, evil world god, evil moral natural, instances evil world, according swinburne evil, god presence evil,
Approximate Word count = 2917
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)
|